On Tue, 8 Oct, 2019, 1:45 AM Thomas Monjalon, <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 07/10/2019 21:29, Jerin Jacob: > > On Mon, 7 Oct, 2019, 11:35 PM Thomas Monjalon, <tho...@monjalon.net> > wrote: > [...] > > let's restart from the beginning by answering simple questions: > > > - what are the use cases of BPF in DPDK? > > > > If something needs to be dynamically controlled then eBPF can be used, > > couple of use cases > > > > # packet filtering > > # debugging > > # function call tracing > > # There are some Lua JIT based dataplane implementations. Which can be > > replaced with eBPF with JIT. > > > > - how much we'll benefit from sharing code with Linux? > > > > I have mentioned some of the performance constraint in the other thread. > > Moreover I don't believe it is not easy task for Linux eBPF to run as > > userspace and I not sure who is going to do that > > I was asking the benefits here: > - sharing optimizations in both projects > Yes. But even if it is different code base it is possible to share the optimization. - get verifier support > Verifier support already available in the library. What else? > I see only avoiding code duplication and getting new feature like cBPF. > > - what can we lose in a single JIT implementation? > > > > Sorry, I didn't understood this question? > > I mean what are the drawbacks of using a Linux implementation? > How performance constraints are differents, etc? > Mention the details in the below thread. Waiting for feedback from Kernel maintainer. http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-October/146004.html http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-October/146063.html > > > Note: as a lot of people, I don't really know BPF, > so these are real questions to help understanding the challenge. > >
